02-21-2019 11:01:19 AM -0800
02-20-2019 06:05:04 PM -0800
02-20-2019 04:41:47 PM -0800
02-20-2019 10:44:11 AM -0800
02-19-2019 07:26:59 AM -0800
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.
PJ Media encourages you to read our updated PRIVACY POLICY and COOKIE POLICY.

Governor Malloy Forces Cops to Choose Job Security Over Public Safety

Imagine, gentle readers, that you are a detective working homicide cases in the city or town where you live. And now imagine that you are investigating a murder in which all the evidence points to a single suspect. Several witnesses tell you they saw what happened, and each of them identifies the same person. You obtain an arrest warrant for the man, book him into jail, and prepare to bring him before the bar of justice.

But now imagine that your case against this man begins to unravel, not because he is innocent of the crime, but rather because your witnesses either recant their inculpating accounts or suddenly cannot be located.

Your suspect, you see, is a gang member, and his associates let it be known in the neighborhood that anyone who testifies against the man will be made to regret it. This message is transmitted through intimidating visits, vandalism, even physical assaults. The intimidation campaign is so effective that none of your witnesses can be counted on to provide the testimony required to hold your suspect to account for the murder. After consultation with the prosecutor assigned to your case, you reach the inescapable conclusion: the charges must be dismissed for lack of evidence. Your suspect goes free, perhaps to kill again.

This is not a farfetched scenario. Every detective has known the experience of seeing someone on the street he is certain has committed a crime but who escaped punishment because witnesses were dissuaded from testifying. There are few things more galling to a cop, but this is the way the world often works.

But in some cases there is a consolation prize, a chance to remove the suspected criminal from the society of his law-abiding neighbors.

In our hypothetical scenario, our suspect is an illegal alien, one who even has been previously deported only to slither back into our midst. With this information in mind, you contact an agent from the Department of Homeland Security, who confirms that the man is indeed eligible for deportation to his home country. The federal agents collect the man and bundle him off. Not the outcome we would have preferred, perhaps, but better to see the man expelled from the country than remain among us as a human ticking bomb. Good riddance, we say.

But not if we are working in Connecticut, where on Wednesday Gov. Daniel Malloy issued what he called “Guidance to Law Enforcement and School Districts Regarding Immigration Matters.”

It’s interesting to note that Gov. Malloy grouped police officers and school districts into the same directive, as though the issues concerning both are somehow similar. This strikes me as a tactical decision intended to insulate the directive against criticism. “But, Dunphy,” the open-borders types will say, “do you want ICE agents rampaging through the schools?”